- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How the Supreme Court confirmation process works
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:33 am
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:33 am
Here's a simple Civics 101 explanation for the less informed on how the process takes place.
Background investigation
Prior to holding a hearing on a nominee, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducts an extensive investigation. According to the Congressional Research Service, this typically includes a questionnaire dealing with biographical, professional, and financial information. On top of this, the FBI conducts a background check and submits a confidential report to the committee. The American Bar Association also has a practice of rating federal judicial nominees with a mark of Well Qualified, Qualified, or Not Qualified, and notifying the committee of their determination.
In addition to this process, Supreme Court nominees often meet privately with senators to discuss their nomination.
Committee hearing
The next step is a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which often lasts four or five days. During the hearing, a nominee testifies on their own behalf and other witnesses will likely present testimony in support of or in opposition to her nomination. Senators typically ask questions related to past decisions a nominee has issued as a judge, political viewpoints they may have expressed that relate to a pertinent judicial issue, their overall judicial and constitutional philosophy, and any questionable aspects of their background.
In addition to their answers at the hearing, the nominee also provides written answers for the record in response to additional questions senators may submit to them in writing.
Since 1992, nominees have also sat for closed-door sessions with the committee to answer any particularly sensitive questions they may have that could have arisen from their confidential background check report.
Committee recommendation
Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the committee takes a vote on the nominee and determines whether or not to recommend the nomination to the full Senate. If a nominee is not recommended by the committee, they may still be confirmed by the full Senate. Justice Clarence Thomas was confirmed despite the Judiciary Committee being split 7-7 on whether to recommend him and then voting 13-1 to send his nomination to the Senate with no recommendation.
Senate debate and vote
Following the Senate Judiciary Committee's vote, the nomination goes before the full Senate. Senators then engage in debate on the Senate floor over the nomination before they hold a vote to end debate. Until recently, the Senate required 60 Senators to vote to end debate, but the Senate changed the rules in 2017 so that only a simple majority is now needed.
FOX News
Background investigation
Prior to holding a hearing on a nominee, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducts an extensive investigation. According to the Congressional Research Service, this typically includes a questionnaire dealing with biographical, professional, and financial information. On top of this, the FBI conducts a background check and submits a confidential report to the committee. The American Bar Association also has a practice of rating federal judicial nominees with a mark of Well Qualified, Qualified, or Not Qualified, and notifying the committee of their determination.
In addition to this process, Supreme Court nominees often meet privately with senators to discuss their nomination.
Committee hearing
The next step is a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which often lasts four or five days. During the hearing, a nominee testifies on their own behalf and other witnesses will likely present testimony in support of or in opposition to her nomination. Senators typically ask questions related to past decisions a nominee has issued as a judge, political viewpoints they may have expressed that relate to a pertinent judicial issue, their overall judicial and constitutional philosophy, and any questionable aspects of their background.
In addition to their answers at the hearing, the nominee also provides written answers for the record in response to additional questions senators may submit to them in writing.
Since 1992, nominees have also sat for closed-door sessions with the committee to answer any particularly sensitive questions they may have that could have arisen from their confidential background check report.
Committee recommendation
Upon the conclusion of the hearing, the committee takes a vote on the nominee and determines whether or not to recommend the nomination to the full Senate. If a nominee is not recommended by the committee, they may still be confirmed by the full Senate. Justice Clarence Thomas was confirmed despite the Judiciary Committee being split 7-7 on whether to recommend him and then voting 13-1 to send his nomination to the Senate with no recommendation.
Senate debate and vote
Following the Senate Judiciary Committee's vote, the nomination goes before the full Senate. Senators then engage in debate on the Senate floor over the nomination before they hold a vote to end debate. Until recently, the Senate required 60 Senators to vote to end debate, but the Senate changed the rules in 2017 so that only a simple majority is now needed.
FOX News
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:49 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
the Senate changed the rules in 2017
I rate that as misleading and lacks context. There was this one dude named Harry Reid who set this precedence.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:55 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:
I rate that as misleading and lacks context.
Not really. That is a fair assessment on how the Senate works without politics of either side being mentioned.
quote:
There was this one dude named Harry Reid who set this precedence.
Now you have a political lean to the article.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:58 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
Now you have an historical context to the article.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 8:59 am to Homesick Tiger
Newsflash...
NONE of that is required under the Constitution.
McConnell could move for a floor vote tomorrow. He won't, but he could.
NONE of that is required under the Constitution.
McConnell could move for a floor vote tomorrow. He won't, but he could.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 9:01 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
the Senate required 60 Senators
What does the Constitution require?
Posted on 10/11/20 at 9:13 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
the Senate changed the rules
The Senate can change all the little rules they want, but if it ain’t written in this rule book-
- then it really doesn’t mean shite. The Senate could constitutionally vote their consent this afternoon if they wanted.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 9:18 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
Justice Clarence Thomas was confirmed despite the Judiciary Committee being split 7-7 on whether to recommend him and then voting 13-1 to send his nomination to the Senate with no recommendation.
Why did they do this to the black guy?
He was, and time has proven it well, imminently qualified.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 9:48 am to Finkle is Einhorn
quote:
Anita Hill
Same as it always was. Dims have ONE play book! Marxist are the scum of our country.
Posted on 10/11/20 at 10:11 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:Added a bit more context. Hope you don’t mind.
There was this one Democrat dude named Harry Reid who set this precedence, and was even kindly warned by the Ranking republican it was a bad idea thst would be used against them at some point.
This post was edited on 10/11/20 at 10:11 am
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News